pain and pleasure

Draft: William Lane Craig on the Evidential Argument from Evolution

This is a draft article I’ve been working on. Any feedback would be appreciated. Abstract: Paul Draper defends what may be called an “evidential argument from evolution” against theism, viz., an argument which purports to show that evolution constitutes strong evidence against theism. In response to this argument, William Lane Craig argues that Draper’s argument depends Draft: William Lane Craig on the Evidential Argument from Evolution

Richard Dawkins and Moral Realism

Christian apologists who love to substitute quote-mining for actual argumentation are fond of quotations like the following, in order to conclude that atheism somehow undermines morality. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, and other people are going to get lucky; and you won’t find Richard Dawkins and Moral Realism

In Defense of an Evidential Argument from Evil: A Reply to William Lane Craig

Abstract: In a popular article about general arguments from evil against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and perfectly good God, William Lane Craig raises objections to such arguments that are consistent with those he earlier raised against Paul Draper’s evidential pain-and-pleasure argument from evil in an oral debate with Draper in 1998. In this article In Defense of an Evidential Argument from Evil: A Reply to William Lane Craig

Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 2

This post is part of a series on Paul Draper’s classic version of the evidential argument from evil. In the previous entry, I explained Draper’s terminology and summarized the logical form of Draper’s two arguments. In this entry, I focus on Draper’s first argument, which attempts to show that known facts about the biological role of Draper on Pain and Pleasure: Part 2